PSX5Central
Playstation/Gaming Discussions => Gaming Discussion => Topic started by: QuDDus on July 21, 2001, 04:56:35 AM
-
Just think about IF PLAYSTATION NEVER CAME OUT. At the time playstation first came out. We where going through a transistion phase. I mean genesis and Snes had gotten old. And we needed something new in gaming. I think if sony would have never made the playstation games like Final Fantasy would have never made it this far. Gt3 would be a mistery. MGS would have never come. Playstation also help improve competition amoung companies like we are seein now. 3 big console giant duking it out. Putting out some of the best games we can imagine. I am glad sony decided to make a console if it would have never came out. We all would have been forced to play Sega saturn,N64, or 3do. I just could not imagine seeing ps2 not being here.
-
So you are glad for it, which is fine, but it didn\'t "Save the games industry". The others would have sold well, and maybe someone else would have gotten in the game. The Playstation was an overrated, underpowered console, that had an extremely poor good games: Games released ratio. Again, that\'s my opinion of course.
-
Nah, they didn\'t SAVE the industry, the industry wasn\'t near death. It had just stagnated, and would\'ve continued to stagnate. It would\'ve most definitely sucked without Playstation around. Rather than saving the industry, Playstation practically re-shaped and rebuilt a niche industry into the 7-billion dollar monster of an industry we know and love. And as QuDDus said, without PSX, games like Metal Gear Solid, Resident Evil, Xenogears, Silent Hill, all these series we so greatly love and anticipate the sequels to would never have seen the light of day in a Nintendo/Sega-only industry. And games like Final Fantasy would have been watered-down, and if the past is any indication, we Americans and Euros wouldn\'t even get to play half of them.
-
Originally posted by Weltall
Nah, they didn\'t SAVE the industry, the industry wasn\'t near death. It had just stagnated, and would\'ve continued to stagnate. It would\'ve most definitely sucked without Playstation around. Rather than saving the industry, Playstation practically re-shaped and rebuilt a niche industry into the 7-billion dollar monster of an industry we know and love. And as QuDDus said, without PSX, games like Metal Gear Solid, Resident Evil, Xenogears, Silent Hill, all these series we so greatly love and anticipate the sequels to would never have seen the light of day in a Nintendo/Sega-only industry. And games like Final Fantasy would have been watered-down, and if the past is any indication, we Americans and Euros wouldn\'t even get to play half of them.
I agree I think withoUt playstation in the mix those games would had died under the gun of nintendo/sega. I mean there is know way we would be where we are in gaming without sony. I mean I couldn\'t image having to just play n64 games and saturn games for 5 strait years. Nintendo may have some fun adventure games but they lack all the great mature games that have come a custom on playstation. I think with dreamcast I would have been ok..but I would have missed so many games leading up to it.
-
man, you guys have gone bonkers havent you?
PSX didn\'t save jack. If PSX didn\'t come out, those games would have been released on Saturn or N64. It\'s not like the developers would say "I got this great idea for a game...too bad we don\'t have a console by Sony around to make it on. Here\'s a little something to swirl around your brain" Kojima used to make nearly all his games for Sega first, like GameArts. Final Fantasy would have been done without the gratuitous FMV, making it ttons better in my mind.
And Saturn and Dreamcast would\'ve been a success, which would have the MOST positive thing for the industry, ever.
Eric Jacob
-
Originally posted by Aaron
So you are glad for it, which is fine, but it didn\'t "Save the games industry". The others would have sold well, and maybe someone else would have gotten in the game. The Playstation was an overrated, underpowered console, that had an extremely poor good games: Games released ratio. Again, that\'s my opinion of course.
Exactly!
There was plenty of games on the Saturn that looked alot better and played alot better , but Sega had its own problems goin\' on. I can think of no 3D fighting game on the Psone that can match the graphics in Virtua Fighter 2.
Sony released more games then anyone else, which makes it look more impressive. But, when you actually take it apart, out of those pile of games only a handful are worth keeping.
If Sony had not came around, Sega or Nintendo would of kept the market alive easily. Sony only capatilized on the mistakes of the other companies. If Sega or Nintendo had their "gameplan" in order before the PS was released, Sony wouldn\'t of been so big. Sony only became big, because other companies was "slacking" off.
But in no way did they "Save the industry".
Just my opinion.
-
Actually if its anything, Sony almost killed the industry.
No longer do you need the quality of a software to be the determinance of sales, it all turn into hype and CG FMVs. Just as long as a game has a state of art FMV or a popular videogame icon on it the mainstream mass would go gaga over it. The quality of gaming has deteoriated dramatically ever since Sony came into the scene. Sequels and sequels of rehashes with little to no innovation are a common place. Square has definitely gone downhill ever since they side with Sony. A company with zero to little innovation like Namco, whom derive most of their games off of carbon copies of Sega\'s software, are embraced by the mainstream gamers. Then we have the whole "milking a series" which found its way into the industry thanks to Sony. Games like Twisted Metal, Gameday, Crash and such took less than a year to make, using the exact same engine with a slight upgrade, just to ride the momentum of the already provided hype. Sony brought gaming into the mainstream mass. Which is, to me, a grave mistake. Who wants a bunch of idiots in our scene anyway? Sure, the industry is getting bigger, but at the same time it is for the wrong reason. Massive amounts of money are being spent on FMVs and graphics and not enough on talent. In the end, things were a lot better when we were niche and only Sega and Nintendo ran things. The quality of gaming has definitely deteriorated and to say that Sony "saved the industry" is pretty much laughable. If it is anything, they are killing it.
-
Playstation was not the savior of the gaming industry. However, if they had NOT release their system, I have a feeling the industry would be held back this generation by the likes of Sega and Nintendo. Making consoles as they saw-fit and charging whatever they want. Imagine a Sega Saturn that costs 399 and a N64 that costs the same while prices only drop annually at 50 bucks each year. We\'d also have a lot less developers as well trying to pay the licensing fees to develop for these two monopolizing companies. Let\'s just say that the competition would be a lot less severe then they have been this generation.
However, a plus to this would probably be the handheld industry with lots of innovations and miniaturization of tons of different chipsets in favor of the most powerful handheld. I don\'t think Nintendo would be monopolizing the industry the way it is now if Sega had anything to say about it and they had the money to back it up.
Thanks to Sony, however, the industry is a much better place with so much competition that prices are equivelant with games and with systems. No system is better then another and it\'s the developers that determine the fate of the industry. The way it is now is best for all gamers and your wallet in general. I\'d say Sony is a big part of this fierce competition and I thank them for bringing it to the table. I just hope MS can fill in where Sega left off and keep that competition extra fierce.
The only thing I can imagine is if Nintendo and Sony kept their partnership with the CD based console they were preparing. Nintendo and Sony ruling together with Squaresoft, EA, and Enix in their corner? Just imagine the stranglehold on the industry these two giants would have.
-
Sony didn\'t save ****.
If the PSX never came along, then most of the developers would of probably made their games on N64 or Saturn and instead of worrying about fancy FMV graphics, they probably would emphasize more on gameplay and better stories.
Saturn definitely wouldn\'t of died that fast, N64 probably would of gotten FF7 like it was going too, the Dreamcast wouldn\'t be released until last year. Sounds good...
BUT! Let\'s say the PSX was never released...
If PSX didn\'t come along then it wouldn\'t force any competition, which makes developers develop better games! Nintendo would of slacked off and made weaker games, Sega would of probably done the same, and the DC and NGC hardware would of been seriously flawed, like the PS2.
When Nintendo and Sega were finished with the 32-bit generation, they felt they were on top of the world. Then, they decided that they could make anything they want and people would still buy it. This probably would of continued until the Xbox was released(which it may not of possibly) and then it took over like the PSX did. Nintendo and Sega would have released bad hardware not even close to as good as the Xbox\'s. NGC and DC would of been like a PS2(Sony thought they could release whatever they wanted too and get away with it). And we would of saw the PSXVsN64VsSaturn all over again with Microsoft grabbing most of the market like Sony did.
So, since the PSX was released, it forced Nintendo and Sega to make BETTER games. If it wasn\'t released, then the 32/64-bit generation would of been crap. This would of happened, trust me.
In conclusion, Sony didn\'t save gaming, they helped it, and I thank them for that.
-
No longer do you need the quality of a software to be the determinance of sales, it all turn into hype and CG FMVs. Just as long as a game has a state of art FMV or a popular videogame icon on it the mainstream mass would go gaga over it.
That is so incredibly wrong. You blame Sony for FMV in games? Maybe the developers discovered that this was a good way to tell the story. If Final Fantasy 6, arguably the best Final Fantasy in the series had FMV, would it be any less of a game as it is considered now? Of course not, in fact, they did do that in the FF Anthology and I didn\'t hear ANY complaints from anybody. The FMV adds to the game, it does not detract from them.
The quality of gaming has deteoriated dramatically ever since Sony came into the scene.
Sony allowed for many no-name developers to enter the industry with the Playstation. Thanks to their easy to program for system, they were able to make or break lots of different companies. Just how popular was THQ before the Smackdown series? Or Neversoft before the Tony Hawk series? Sure, there has been a lot of crap, but hey, there has been a lot of great games along the way as well.
Sequels and sequels of rehashes with little to no innovation are a common place. Square has definitely deteriorate ever since they side with Sony.
That\'s debatable. I can\'t remember the last game that resembled Vagrant Story. I also can\'t remember when I had so much fun playing an RPG sequel that remained faithful to the original in so many ways while improving on it with tons of extras and innovation like Chrono Cross did. That\'s a matter of opinion though again and you owe it to yourself to try both of those games before writing them off as rehashes or FMV intensive games. Vagrant Story had an FMV opening and an FMV ending, but that was all.
A company with zero to little innovation like Namco, whom derive most of their games off of carbon copies of Sega\'s software, are embraced by the mainstream gamers.
Namco makes fun games. I had no idea that Soul Calibur stole from a Sega game though, perhaps you can tell me which one. Maybe you are saying that Ridge Racer is a lot like Sega Rally? If you are, that\'s an odd comparison. Also, what other arcade jet fighter game by Sega resembles Ace Combat? I can\'t think of any. I suppose Klonoa looks like Sonic... but they are two totally different games alike only in their genre of platformer. Hmm, perhaps I am out of touch, perhaps you can tell me the games that are all carbon copies besides the apparent likeness of VF to the Tekken series.
. Then we have the whole "milking a series" which found its way into the industry thanks to Sony. Games like Twisted Metal, Gameday, Crash and such took less than a year to make, using the exact same engine with a slight upgrade, just to ride the momentum of the already provided hype.
I think Capcom was the prioneers of that trend with the Street Fighter series which has been more and more refined over the years to create some of the best fighters to date. However, that rehash trend is still apparent with Capcom Vs SNK Pro which only adds to characters to the original while keeping with the exact same menu format as the original. This however was apparent even in the days of the SuperNES with the transition from Street Fighter 2 to Super Street Fighter 2. Every company is guilty of milking a franchise from time to time and Sony is not responsible for this happening. The gaming companies make games that sell and when you have a formula that works, you tend to stick to it. Over the past 4 years or so, we\'ve had about 4 RE games and 2 games that rip off from the formula all by the same company spanning up to foru different platforms. Sony doesn\'t tell Capcom to do this, they do it themselves, but then again, so does EA and a lot of other companies.
Sony brought gaming into the mainstream mass. Which is, to me, a grave mistake. Who wants a bunch of idiots in our scene anyway?
Our scene? What exactly are you talking about? You make it sound like gaming was an exclusive club to a few people who didn\'t feel like going out and playing on the swings but rather staying home with a joystick and staring at a TV. It was never exclusive to anyone and because the industry has boomed, we get more better games. How anyone can see this as bad puzzles me.
Sure, the industry is getting bigger, but at the same time it is for the wrong reason. Massive amounts of money are being spent on FMVs and graphics and not enough on talent. In the end, things were a lot better when we were niche and only Sega and Nintendo ran things.
Again, I highly disagree. Bigger for the wrong reason? It\'s bigger because more people enjoy games and the more games we get the more fun we have. Sure there is a lot of crap to sift through, but those diamonds that we do find are truly excellent and a testament to the greatness of the 16-bit days. I\'m sorry you want to keep it as a niche, but that just means gaming could have been nothing but a costly chance for companies to invest in. I like how it is now so we can have more competition with more companies for more games.
If its anything, they are killing it.
Tell that to the huge companies that support it. I know I want AT LEAST 9 games from now till December from Sony that I will DEFINITELY buy. At 50 bucks a game, that\'s nothing to laugh at. You say they are killing the industry, I say they are responsible for some of the best competition that our wallets truly benefit from.
-
Just when I was going to reply I read Ryu\'s response. There\'s nothing more that I can pretty much add. Thanks Ryu. :)
Tshirts you say Sony almost killed the industry, I suppose M$ is a godsend right? :rolleyes:
- dm
- the trick is to keep breathing.
-
RYU, he is right about Namco though, but they don\'t jsut steal from Sega, they do it from Konami too.
VF - Tekken
18 Wheeler - Namco\'s trucking game (something orchestra or something)
silent scope - Golgo 13
space harrier - Burning Force
Namco is unworthy of the praise they get from everyone, IMO.
Eric Jacob
-
RYU, he is right about Namco though, but they don\'t jsut steal from Sega, they do it from Konami too.
VF - Tekken
18 Wheeler - Namco\'s trucking game (something orchestra or something)
silent scope - Golgo 13
space harrier - Burning Force
Namco is unworthy of the praise they get from everyone, IMO.
I never thought about their other franchises. I was just thinking of what Sega had that namco stole from in his suggestion. I couldn\'t think of too many honestly and I was thinking of only the really key franchises that make Namco the bucks. VF and Tekken is an obvious one, but Ridge Racer, Soul Calibur, and a couple of others are really nice games that are unlike anything else or at least provide something new to the genre. I can still remember how fun the original Ridge Racer was when the PSX first came out and I still enjoy Soul Calibur on the DC from time to time. I may have been in the wrong about Namco copying other companies, but their key franchises are still pretty damn fun regardless and I don\'t think Sony is responsible for their business decisions regarding them.
Just when I was going to reply I read Ryu\'s response. There\'s nothing more that I can pretty much add. Thanks Ryu.
You\'re welcome as always. :D
-
PSX didn\'t save jack. If PSX didn\'t come out, those games would have been released on Saturn or N64. It\'s not like the developers would say "I got this great idea for a game...too bad we don\'t have a console by Sony around to make it on. Here\'s a little something to swirl around your brain" Kojima used to make nearly all his games for Sega first, like GameArts. Final Fantasy would have been done without the gratuitous FMV, making it ttons better in my mind.
And Saturn and Dreamcast would\'ve been a success, which would have the MOST positive thing for the industry, ever.
That\'s bull. I can guarantee you Nintendo would NEVER EVER EVER ALLOW Xenogears to come to America, and for some reason they\'ve always avoided Sega like the plague, so I would have missed out on the best RPG ever made. And games as ambitious as Metal Gear Solid would not have been possible to make because without the industry becoming larger, they would not have had the budget they had to create such a masterpiece. Also, if Playstation wasn\'t around to destroy Saturn, N64 would\'ve done the job just as well. Sega destroyed the Saturn AND the Dreamcast because they run a amazingly retarded business. They screwed up royally with Saturn\'s launch, they practically invited Sony to kick their ass. And when people see that, and they see Sega\'s illustrious history of failures, it\'s no wonder people didn\'t buy into Dreamcast. Do I think they should have based it on Sega\'s history? No. I love my Dreamcast to death regardless. But if all those people saw Saturn self-destruct the way it did, why should they expect Dreamcast not to do the same thing? It\'s sad, but first impressions are obviously lasting ones.
If Sony had not came around, Sega or Nintendo would of kept the market alive easily. Sony only capatilized on the mistakes of the other companies. If Sega or Nintendo had their "gameplan" in order before the PS was released, Sony wouldn\'t of been so big. Sony only became big, because other companies was "slacking" off.
But in no way did they "Save the industry".
I agree, they did not save anything, there was nothing to save really. The Game industry in 1995 wasn\'t dead, just rather stale. What Sony did do was expand the industry, turned it into a major industry. There\'s good and bad results from it, but still. I also agree that Sony had enough luck to get on top, but they had the marketing skills to stay there. I personally think that the market would be worse off without the Playstation, as I said before, there were some Great Playstation games that I don\'t think we\'d have seen if they had been on Sega or Nintendo, because neither would\'ve had PSX\'s userbase, and thus, the developer would\'nt have had quite the incentive to bring us niche games and truly new experiences like Metal Gear.
Actually if its anything, Sony almost killed the industry.
No longer do you need the quality of a software to be the determinance of sales, it all turn into hype and CG FMVs. Just as long as a game has a state of art FMV or a popular videogame icon on it the mainstream mass would go gaga over it.
Popular Videogame icon? The very thing that Sega and Nintendo THRIVED on? Sonic? Mario? Jesus man, Icons were the bread and butter of those companies and they really still are! And I still can\'t be convinced that CGs are a bad thing, I would have bought every Final Fantasy whether they had them or not because I was an FF fan long before the PSX days. And if N64 was able to support FMV, you most definitely would\'ve seen it on N64 games. And let\'s also not forget the company who made a console infamous for its FMV interactive movies *cough*SegaCD*cough*
Sequels and sequels of rehashes with little to no innovation are a common place. Square has definitely gone downhill ever since they side with Sony. A company with zero to little innovation like Namco, whom derive most of their games off of carbon copies of Sega\'s software, are embraced by the mainstream gamers.
Hmm... Who remembers there being, oh what, like 9 Mega Man games on NES and SNES? 4 Sonic games on Genesis? How did any of those games differ from one another besides the levels?
Bah, I\'m typed out. I agree with a lot of what Ryu said. But I think Jumpman said it best. They didn\'t save the industry. They just helped it.
-
Maybe som of you have "EYES WIDE SHUT SENDROME" because at the time psx came in gaming was going nowhere. IF it was not for sony you would have never seen ff evolve the way it did. Because nintendo kept there old busines strategy and ways and change nothing. And square was looking to bring ff to a whole new audience and take it graphics to a different level. I believe sega would have died anyways. Whether some of you would like to believe it or not. The saturn was crap. It was not a good enough machine that it would have survived 5 years of gaming it would have killed itself. Nintendo would have still done fine by living off of past success. But gaming would not be where it is at if sony had not jump into the console mix.
I mean if you choose to close your eyes and act like nintendo is not seen as kiddy console to most ppl then do that. But it is and they develope more games catering to one type of genre. Not that this is bad thing, but I say if you take psx out of the gaming market from 1995-2000 there is noway mgs,gt3,Xenogears, Resident evil,Silent hill and all the other great games would have seen the light of day on a struggling sega system, and a N64.
-
Originally posted by QuDDus
saturn was crap. It was not a good enough machine that it would have survived 5 years of gaming it would have killed itself. Nintendo would have still done fine by living off of past success. But gaming would not be where it is at if sony had not jump into the console mix.
Please pass me some of what you are smoking. The Saturn was crap? Have you ever played one? Or do you assume it was just crap, because it wasn\'t as "mainstream"?
Virtua Fighter 2.
Fighters MegaMix
All the great 2D Capcom games was on it and better then their PS versions.
The Panzer Dragoon Trilogy.
ClockWork Knight 1 & 2.
Nights! (One of the best 32bit games)
Burning Rangers
Sega Rally.
Virtua Cop 1 & 2
The list goes on and on (I didn\'t even list the Treasure games,etc)
If the PS had never came around it would of just forced developers to learn the Saturn hardware better and then we would of seen games like Resident Evil on the Saturn.. We wouldn\'t of seen cheap ports like CastleVania. Instead, developers would of been forced to actually take time and learn the system.
So , no it did not save the industry. It may of helped provide competion and so on, but it didn\'t save the industry.
-
Saturn is the best system ever IMO. ANd that is not just because I am a huge Sega fan, it is because I love 2D fighters and 2D in general.
Some of MY Saturn games include (I would always like to have more):
Virtua Fighter 2
Virtua Cop
Virus
Resident Evil
Tomb Raider
X-Men vs. Street Fighter
Street Fighter Alpha 2
Grandia
Deep Fear
Sega Rally Netlink
Virtual On: Cybe Troopers Netlink
Duke Nukem 3D (netlink!)
Sonic R
Sonic 3D Blast
Shining Force 3
Shining Wisdom
Soukygentarai
Radiant Silvergun
Thunderforce V
Dracula X
Panzer Dragoon 2 and Saga
Daytona CCE
Wip3out
Mr. Bones.
and on
and on
and on.
Don\'t talk to me about Saturn being a crappy system. Saturn had online games, did your PSX do that? I am guessing you think so highly of your PSX because you bought the BJ-1000 peripheral. SO you could play Tomb Raider: The Last Revelation in the dark.
Saturn catered to RPGs way before PSX even had it\'s first one in the US. Before 1997, PSX only had 4 RPGs in America. BTW, there are several games above that I listed that were also on PSX, but almost NONE of them looked nearly as good as they did when on Saturn, Saturn was just better built.
the games you listed would have moved to Saturn or PSX and would still have easily been able to be done. Thinking that PSX was the reason those games came out is laughable, since those games are all from huge developers anyway. What Sony did for the gaming community was lower it\'s standards so low that every crapfaced dev. out there would work on it, just because Sony would put there approval on any junk shoved in their face. This is not to say that there werent good games on PSX, but the crap to good ratio is worse on PSX than on anything else made, besides PS2 as it stands currently.
I owned more US Saturn games in the 3 years it was out then I ever have for PSX.
Eric Jacob
-
I agree with almost everything you said, Altered. The Saturn did have a lot more power than the PSX, which really showed in its 2D games. I think it would have been way more successful than the PSX was if it wasn\'t for the Sega CD and 32X. After those two add-ons, people were afraid to buy a Sega product. I think that if Sega didn\'t make those two mistakes, they would still be making consoles today -- and probably more successful than Nintendo. Sony was lucky that they came into the video game industry when they did.
I don\'t agree with this though:
Originally posted by AlteredBeast
What Sony did for the gaming community was lower it\'s standards so low that every crapfaced dev. out there would work on it, just because Sony would put there approval on any junk shoved in their face. This is not to say that there werent good games on PSX, but the crap to good ratio is worse on PSX than on anything else made, besides PS2 as it stands currently.
Like Ryu said, the PSX being so easy to program for, and Sony being so easy on the developers and approving almost anything made it easy for even the smallest companies to get involved in the video game industry. I think Ryu explained it best, so just read what he said:
Sony allowed for many no-name developers to enter the industry with the Playstation. Thanks to their easy to program for system, they were able to make or break lots of different companies. Just how popular was THQ before the Smackdown series? Or Neversoft before the Tony Hawk series? Sure, there has been a lot of crap, but hey, there has been a lot of great games along the way as well.
-
thats what I said IronFist!
Sony had almost 0 quality control. Which is why there are so many crappy games on PSX.
you did back me up ya know. :D
Eric Jacob
-
Saturn didn\'t suck at all. It just never had a chance, because Sega just missed the boat all together. I think with the right moves, if it were just Saturn and N64, I think Sega could\'ve had a legitmate chance to beat N64. But Sega is a terrific deleper that\'s been ran by the most incredibly inept and flat out retarded people. They gave themselves a tainted reputation with their Saturn screwups, and that\'s why Dreamcast is dead now.
Also dude, saying Saturn had netplay is like saying N64 had RPGs, You could get Saturn\'s Modem and play online with the twelve other people in the known universe that own one:D
Seriously though Altered, I\'d love to see your Saturn collection. I have one of the black beauties, but only three games, and no place around here sells them anymore:(
-
thats about 1/2 of my games, but some of the others are pretty crappy.
If you\'re 3 games are Virtua Fighter 2, Virtua Cop, and Daytona, I am punching you in the face through my phone line. :)
I could send you some of my doubles if you want, just pm me.
Eric Jacob
-
Close. VF1, VC1 and Myst:( A friend gave all this to me. I do have a NIGHTS controller though.
How long would your offer stand? I\'m very strapped for monies right now, so I can\'t buy any games right now. But once I get a little set aside, yeah, I might buy some of your doubles.
Do you have an extra Resident Evil?:D
-
no charge, they are ust sitting in one of my game shelves and it\'s not like I have anytihng to do with them.
I do have 2 Resident Evils, but that game is just uncommon enough to have to pay for it :)
I do have a couple good ones, though.
Eric Jacob
-
Just about every person in this thread commented on just how great Saturn was so I\'m not going to repeat those FACTS. I will say this though:
Whatever great mature games Nintendo would never touch, the Saturn would have. MGS for example, Silent Hill, I\'m sure we\'d see the dancing Konami games such as BeMani and others appear there as well. I\'m also sure that Sega would be VERY impartial towards the little developers trying to make a name for themselves. EA would still be with Sega, of course meaning VIsual Concepts, a much better company then EA will ever be, would be dead right now. As for FF, I could even picture them going to the Saturn for a game or two after FF7 for their CD-based format and their superior polygon pushing powers. We all know Squaresoft are graphics whores.
Point is, when developers are limited in what they can do, they want the most freedom a console developer can offer and thus the console that offers the most freedom will be their console of choice. Of course Sega\'s standards are much higher then Sonys, but nowhere NEAR as much of a b|tch as Nintendo\'s are and I think because of that, a LOT more games would hit the Saturn DESPITE its difficulty of programming. Not to mention that the Saturn had 2 full YEARS on Nintendo\'s release of the N64. If Sony had nothing to say about anything in the console world and stuck to TV\'s FOR consoles specifically, I can almost GUARANTEE a win by Sega last generation.
That would make an interesting debate... "If Sony never existed, which console would have won the 32/64 bit era?" I wonder who is CRAZY enough to do it... I\'d sure as hell reply!
-
Originally posted by Ryu
That would make an interesting debate... "If Sony never existed, which console would have won the 32/64 bit era?" I wonder who is CRAZY enough to do it... I\'d sure as hell reply!
Did it.;)
Go reply..:laughing:
-
I don\'t have a problem with FMV being in videogames. The only problem I have with Sony is the fact that they are using it as a vocal selling point for most of their major games. I mean, when you look at the commercials for these games, all they show are CGI graphics. Of course the typical mainstream buyer will go ooohh and aaahh, thinking those are actual in game graphics, and will most likely be enticed to buy it. Before all this, in the 16-bit era, the only way a game will sell is if it is actually good. Mainstream buyers wasn\'t the main buyers, and it is the hardcore gamers, who want great games, that are the determining factor of a console\'s success.
Granted, we have Capcom milking franchises prior to Sony, but the only game that they milked was Mega man and it was a solid series despite being rehashed. EA can get away with it because their titles are sports and most gamers would prefer to have updated rosters every year. Sony basically set a "trend". More developers were jumping to the gun just because Sony was doing it and making a lot of money. Milking the series was commonplace, and many developers were definitely influenced by Sony\'s stance. Why spend years to improve a sequel when you can just dish a crappy one out and still make the same amount of money. The mantra still holds true today.
I am sorry but Neversoft and THQ are not "small in house developers graced by Sony". THQ is a multi million dollar company that buy expensive franchises such as Ren and Stimpy. Neversoft derived off of Shiny entertainment and if I can recall correctly their first game was on the Sega Saturn and not the PSX. Besides, the developement kit for the PSX wasn\'t much more than the Saturn, and if these developers, with limited funds, can afford a PSX kit, they sure as hell can afford the Saturn\'s. If its anything, Sony\'s lack of quality control paved a way for a sea of crappy titles on the PSX. Little Joe can spend two days making a videogame for the system, send it to Sony, and easily have them approve it. Whereas, he would be shot down by both Nintendo and Sega. That is part of the reason why the PSX has the worse crap software to good ratio of any console to date. I am also hard press to find any quality, small, niche game from a struggling company on the PSX, whereas I can name you a plethora of crap softwares from almost any genre.
Regarding Square on PSX. The games that are not backed by the corporates at Sony are actually the best Square has to offer. The subdivisions that made Chrono Cross, Vagrant Story, Tobal 2, and Xenogears were in no way funded or helped by Sony. Those were full fledged, Square made games. Games like the Final Fantasy series and Parasite Eve were actually a Square/Sony joint project where Sony does the advertising and additional funding while Square works on the project. These games are usually rushed in hopes of meeting the deadline that Sony usually sets.
About Namco. I am sorry but you are blind if you don\'t think they are the biggest Sega ripoffs. I mean, back then any game that Sega would release there would be a Namco version of the same game. It got incredibly ridiculous. Sega released VF, Namco counters with Tekken. Daytona = Ridge Racer. Time Crisis = Virtua Cop. The list goes on from flight simulators, to Skateboarding. Basically anything Sega does Namco would copy.
The only reason why everyone loved Sony and embraced them was because of Bernie Stolar. He was a gamer for the gamer. Bernie pushed hard for RPGs and niche games from Japan, but after he left Sony, they were nothing but a bunch of corporate d*ckheads who don\'t know jack about gaming. I mean, they tried to kill 2D gaming because it was "too old fashion". Bernie is the only shining point over at Sony.
-
American Sega fans know how reasuring it was to have Mr. Stolar as CEO, then those Japanese corperate ****heads fired him.
-
I\'ll say this If it weren\'t for SONY, FF7 wouldn\'t be FF7, Nintendo would\'ve turned down that idea. There would be no Saga Frontier or Xenogears, and probably no FFT. Sony gave Square the ability to put out FF8 which had some good things and other things that are uncharacteristic of Square. The Tobal series would\'ve been shot to hell as would Bushido Blade. SONY\'s lack of quality control opened up the innovation valves ( in some cases ) to rival those of the PC games. But some of the thing that came THROUGH the valve should\'ve been sent back --Return to Sender--
-
IMO if the PS1 wasn\'t introduced then Sega would have 3 reasons for being on top.
1) CD format is inexpensive to produce compared to cartridge
2) Nintendo\'s licensing fees were very high, so game companies had trouble making money.
3) Mature theme games would go Sega\'s way.